Evaluating the quality and accessibility of physical activity resources in two southern cities

Am J Health Promot. 2012 Sep-Oct;27(1):52-4. doi: 10.4278/ajhp.110617-ARB-257.

Abstract

Purpose: Access and quality of physical activity resources (PARs) influence physical activity (PA) participation. This study examined the type, size, accessibility, features, amenities, and incivilities of PARs in two cities.

Design: Researchers identified all PARs within an 800-meter radius of the homes of participants from a larger study. Each PAR was evaluated by a trained assessor.

Setting: PARs were evaluated in Houston and Austin, Texas.

Patients: The final sample included 1326 PARs in Houston and 297 in Austin, Texas.

Measures: The 2010 Physical Activity Resource Assessment (PARA), a direct-observation audit tool, was used to assess the type, size, accessibility, features, amenities, and incivilities of a PAR.

Analysis: Both t-tests and analyses of variance were used to determine differences in features, amenities, and incivilities by city, type, and accessibility.

Results: Houston PARs had greater amenities (t[421] = 4.445; p < .001) and fewer incivilities (t[371] = -6.89; p < .001) than Austin PARs. Combination resources had the highest score for features (M = 9.94; standard deviation [SD] = 5.62); fitness clubs had the highest score for amenities (M = 17.06; SD = 5.27); and trails had the most incivilities (M = 4.23; SD = 4.88). Free PARs had greater features (F[3, 1509] = 16.87; p < .001), amenities (F[3, 1500] = 3.13; p = .025), and incivilities (F[3, 1540] = 21.97; p < .001) than pay for use PARs.

Conclusion: Improvements to quality and maintenance of existing free PARs may be an economical strategy to increase PA.

MeSH terms

  • Cities / statistics & numerical data*
  • Environment Design / statistics & numerical data*
  • Health Resources / statistics & numerical data
  • Humans
  • Motor Activity*
  • Residence Characteristics / statistics & numerical data
  • Texas